asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Hillery <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Test Coverage
Date Sat, 21 May 2016 02:48:39 GMT
Sounds good to me. Can we have a meaningful goal for increasing coverage on
existing classes too? Not sure what that would mean exactly, open to

On May 20, 2016 6:50 PM, "abdullah alamoudi" <> wrote:

> Thanks to Mike Blow, we now have reports of our test coverage for the code
> base.
> Testing is essential in controlling code quality and our current coverage
> could use serious improvement.
> Now that we have the tools to get coverage information, I suggest we
> establish a minimum required test coverage for all changes. We can start by
> enforcing this on new classes while not reducing the coverage for existing
> classes.
> I suggest we set the minimum coverage to 80%. What is nice about this is
> that this is an objective measure and no one can claim he's being treated
> unfairly.
> Code that is not tested is a broken code. Thoughts?

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message